SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(Bom) 136

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
MASODKAR AND TATED, JJ.
Babu Sadashiv Jadhav, Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No.543 of 1981
Decided on : 9-4-1984.

Advocates:
Advcoates appeared:
R.R. Vyas, (Appointed), for Appellant; M.D. Gangakhedkar Public Prosecutor, for the State.

A person who is intoxicated is still liable for their actions, unless they were so intoxicated that they were unable to form the necessary intent to commit the crime.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - CULPABLE HOMICIDE NOT AMOUNTING TO MURDER - S. 304(1) I.P.C. - INTENTION TO CAUSE DEATH - INTOXICATION - S. 86 I.P.C. - SENTENCE.

Fact of the Case:

The accused, Babu Sadashiv Jadhav, was convicted of murdering his wife, Kondabai, by pouring kerosene oil on her and setting her on fire. The accused appealed the conviction, arguing that it was a case of pure accident.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution had satisfactorily proved that the accused had poured kerosene oil on his wife and set her on fire, causing her death. However, the court also found that the accused did not intend to cause his wife's death, but rather that he had acted in a state of intoxication and anger.

Issues: 1. Whether the accused intended to cause his wife's death. 2. Whether the accused was so intoxicated that he was unable to form the necessary intent to cause death. 3. What sentence should be imposed on the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the accused did intend to cause his wife's death, as evidenced by his act of pouring kerosene oil on her and setting her on fire. However, the court also found that the accused was intoxicated at the time of the incident, and that this intoxication reduced his culpability. 2. The court held that the accused was not so intoxicated that he was unable to form the necessary intent to cause death. The court noted that the accused had been drinking, but that he was not so drunk that he was unable to understand the consequences of his actions. 3. The court held that the appropriate sentence for the accused was seven years' rigorous imprisonment.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the conviction for murder and instead convicting the accused of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The court sentenced the accused to seven years' rigorous imprisonment.

Judgement

TATED, J.:- The accused Babu Sadashiv Jadhav preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dt. 1st Nov. 1980 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 74 of 1980 convicting him of the offence under S. 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life.

2. The accused was married to deceased Kondabai about five years before the date of the incident, that is, 25th Jan. 1980, and during the wedlock they had one son and one daughter. The daughter was about four years of age and the son was about one year old at the time of the incident. After the marriage, for about three years they resided with the parents of the accused and thereafter they had a separate residence at a distance of about 100 feet from the hut of the parents of the accused. It is alleged that the accused suspected the character of his wife, and, therefore, there used to be quarrels between them. The accused was also addicted to liquor, and under the influence of liquor he used to quarrel and beat his wife. On 25th Jan. 1980 at night the deceased took food. The hut where the accused and the deceased resided was a small room with a roof of corrugated iron sheets. It was in the zopadpatti area surrounded by many huts. At about 11 p.m. the accused quarrelled with his wife and there were hot altercations. The accused was drunk and was very much upset. He beat his wife and poured kerosene oil on her person and set her on fire by applying a lighted match stick. Kondabai started shouting for help. The accused also tried to extinguish the fire and in that attempt he sustained burns on his hands. The neighbours collected and poured water on Kondabai and extinguished the fire. She was taken to the neighbouring hut of the accused's parents. Her mother Shivbai Dharma More (P.W. 4), who resided at a distance of about 100 feet from the hut of the accused, on knowing about the incident, rushed to the hut of Kondabai's mother-in-law, Kondabai was at that time crying in agony and said that her husband poured kerosene oil on her and ignited by applying a match stick. On knowing this from Kondabai, Shivbai rushed to the Police Chowki and reported the matter to Police Head Constable Fatruddin Gurmohamed Mulani (P.W. 6), who made a note thereof in the Station Diary. Thereafter along with Shivbai he went to the hut of Peranbai, mother of the accused. He posted one constable to watch the spot, and returned to the Police Chowki and gave message to P.S.I. Sitaram Narayan Kadam (P.W. 14) about the incident. He called a wireless van and again went to the hut of Peranbai. Kondabai was removed to the Sassoon Hospital.

3. Dr. Jayantilal Mukundraj Talesara (P.W. 10), who was on duty at the hospital, examined Kondabai at about 1.40 a.m. He asked her how she suffered the burn injuries, and she replied that her husband poured Kerosene oil on her person and set her on fire. Dr. Talesara found burns on the face, head, neck, chest and on both upper arms of Kondabai. At some places burns were superficial and at other places burns were deep. Kondabai had suffered 44% burn injuries. P.S.I. Kadam (P.W. 14) on receiving information from the Police Chowki visited the hospital. He went to the residence of Special Executive Magistrate Mr. Digambar Krishnaji Kulkarni (P.W. 3) on 26th Jan. 1980 at about 2 a.m. and took him to the hospital for recording the dying declaration of Kondabai.

4. Special Executive Magistrate Mr. Kulkarni (P.W. 3) at about 2.30 a.m. reached the hospital and contacted Dr. Talesara (P.W. 10), who was on duty, and after making enquiry with him whether the patient was in a position to make statement, he recorded her dying declaration Ex. 11. In her statement before Mr. Kulkarni she gave out that her husband under the influence of drink beat her, and as she questioned him, he became angry, poured kerosene oil from the bottle and ignited her sari, with a match stick. She further stated that her husband started extinguishing her burnin





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top